Anna Raccoon Archives

Post navigation

'Truly awful, dreadful' – The Yewtree Allegations (continued)

The Anna Raccoon Archives

by Anna Raccoon on July 7, 2014

Back last November, an excitable Alan Collins of Pannone, once a proudly independent Manchester law firm of some repute, but now a mere sub-division of the global Brobdingnagian Slater and Gordon, was breathlessly announcing that he was getting ‘fresh claims every week’ and now 32 National Health Hospitals where the ‘Pervert Savile, who died in 2011 aged 84, is believed to have used his privileged access to abuse hundreds of children in NHS care.’

32 Hospitals had to divert senior staff to investigate these ‘claims’ – so far I have gone through 20 of those reports, and I am still looking for the ‘Truly awful, dreadful‘ abuse which the media tell us has been carried out on ‘children as young as five’.

Full scale investigations like this cost a great deal of money in respect of man hours. Money that the NHS is desperately short of.

Hospital after hospital, on opening the highly secret envelope containing the ‘Yewtree allegations’ in respect of their hospital, have found themselves holding a piece of paper which can be roughly summarised as “someone who wouldn’t give their name phoned Yewtree and said that someone whose name they couldn’t remember, had told their aunty, who is now dead, that someone who looked like Jimmy Savile might have been on their ward five years before they were admitted….”

I am fully in agreement that all allegations of abuse by Jimmy Savile or anyone else should be thoroughly investigated – but someone, certainly Yewtree, and I suspect the lawyers of the claimants, would have been totally aware that an allegation that Jimmy Savile ‘might’ have once walked across the tarmac of hospital property, without any further allegation of impropriety – shouldn’t be taking up valuable NHS resources.

That isn’t a brave victim coming forward after 40 years when they were too upset to speak out earlier – that is plain nonsensical tittle tattle forced to consume NHS resources to counter the PR campaign run by the lawyers of potential claimants.

Someone has gone without treatment, or a pay rise, to pay for each of these execrable reports. Maybe it was your Aunty.

Operation Yewtree recorded a sexual offence in respect of Miss ‘A’ that JS had sexually assaulted her whilst she was ‘in traction’ in an orthopaedic ward – the allegation was made by a nurse (N1) who alleged she was told this by another nurse (N2). (N2) was allegedly given this information by the patient, but had not witnessed the incident.

A ‘second’ allegation was made anonymously, allegedly describing the first incident.

The alleged victim (Ms ‘A’) when interviewed, ‘vehemently denied’ that any such incident had taken place. She remembered the visit by JS to her ward, but stated he was accompanied and ‘would not have had the opportunity to do anything untoward’.

(N1) denied being behind the anonymous phone call. She could not provide any information which allowed (N2) to be identified or contacted.

Investigators concluded that there was no evidence to support that any incident involving JS took place at De La Pole Hospital.

Operation Yewtree recorded a call from a Northumbria police officer that in or around 1992-1993, he was speaking with a woman involved with hospital radio at the (then) Dryburn Hospital about Peter Hetherington, a North East disc jockey who had been arrested in connection with sexual offences against children. The woman in question stated that Mr Hetherington “used to lure” young girls / boys to hotels for Jimmy Savile. No allegation of misbehaviour by JS at Dryburn Hospital.

The visit to Shotley Bridge Hospital was recorded in a book entitled ‘The Story of Shotley Bridge Hospital, Consett’ which was brought to the attention of the Trust by a member of the public. According to the account in this book, Jimmy Savile visited the children’s ward on 4th January 1981. No allegation of misbehaviour by JS at Shotley Bridge Hospital.

61 pages later…the investigator concludes that JS, visiting the children’s ward, accompanied by the Hospital Photographer, his assistant, a Hospital Sector Administrator, a Ward Sister, four members of the nursing staff and police officers PC Brian Jones (now retired) and Superintendent Albert Baines (JS was there to present a cheque on behalf of Consett police!) didn’t abuse any children, nip off to the mortuary or steal any glass eyes…

The investigators were unable to conclude whether JS ate a sandwich before going onto the ward, afterwards, or even if at all…

No evidence of anything untoward or inappropriate taking place during the hospital visit, involving Jimmy Savile and the children on the ward, has come to light. Nor were there ever any allegations.

The Hospital Radio manager was identified as a Mrs Staley. She was asked whether, to her knowledge, any alleged procurement had taken place at Dryburn Hospital, or involved the Hospital, its staff or anyone else connected to it. Mrs Staley explicitly stated that it had not and that, based on what Person X had told her, she had the impression that any such procurement had taken place at a specific location and involved a third party unrelated to Dryburn Hospital. Mrs Staley told us that she did not report these matters to the police as, from her previous experience of Person X, she doubted the reliability of the statements.

An allegation of serious offence by an employee at Hammersmith Hospital made by an anonymous caller, and an ‘allegation’ that Jimmy savile had attended a fundraising event at the Hospital in 1974.

The investigation team found that, due to insufficient detail having been provided by the anonymous informant to the MPS, this allegation proved extremely difficult to investigate. As such, despite enquiries, no leads could be found and therefore the allegation could not be investigated further or corroborated.

The investigating team was able to confirm that Savile was present at a Friends of Hammersmith Hospital fundraising Autumn Fair in November 1974. The investigation team did not uncover any reports of an untoward incident and individuals who remember this Fair recall that Savile was accompanied throughout his visit to Hammersmith Hospital.

Operation Yewtree passed on a third party allegation that 28 years ago the Informant was working for a company in Sutton.To the best of his recollection a young female colleague had a relative or friend who had cancer and was either in ‘the Marsden’ or ‘Stoke Mandeville’. One day the colleague was very upset and when asked why she said that JS had been at the hospital and had made sexual advances towards her and had possibly touched her.

The Informant was unable to recall the details. He could recall his colleague’s name but acknowledged that this could have changed. He could not provide any further details regarding his third party reporting of incident as told to him and nor could he provide further contact details/names for any of the subjects mentioned.

The current and former Trust staff members interviewed do not recall JS having any association with The Royal Marsden or being on the premises at any point. The search undertaken in local media archives revealed no evidence of an association between JS and The Royal Marsden. Operation Yewtree police searches have been unable to trace the potential witness referred to within the original allegation. The police advise that this enquiry should not be progressed any further.

Operation Yewtree recorded an allegation by Ms ‘A’ she had ‘seen‘ JS’s Rolls Royce at Odstock Hospital whilst working there as a radiographer and that JS would talk to the porters and patients at Odstock; and further, that there were patients who had been moved from Stoke Mandeville Hospital to Odstock Hospital and that in her view ‘that was suspicious’.

Having taken due care and advice re: not further traumatising (!) this witness who had set eyes on JS’ Rolls Royce (allegedly) the investigators on further talking with her, came to the conclusion that there was no point in interviewing more patients since there was no allegation of wrong doing with any patient, nor was she claiming that he had any contact with patients. 72 (including the Yewtree Witness) members of staff were identified as working in Odstock Spinal Treatment Centre between 1983 and 1993, including Consultants, Nurses, administrative staff, Therapists, Radiographers and General Porters.

Interestingly, the ‘Yewtree’ report stated she saw JS chatting to patients. On questioning her about this during the interview she was very clear she had never seen JS with any patients.

On interviewing the Porters: Porters 1 & 2 said that they were told by a colleague (Porter 3) who was on duty at the time, that JS had attended the Porters Lodge for a cup of tea. This was a weekend afternoon.

Porter 3, when interviewed, had no recollection of JS visiting the Porters Lodge, or Odstock Hospital, and had never met JS .

The Investigation Team have been unable to follow any further lines of enquiry in this regard, and have formed the conclusion that this investigation has been unable to identify evidence to corroborate the suggestion that unusual or inappropriate transfers, influenced by JS, occurred between Odstock and Stoke Mandeville Hospitals.

Operation Yewtree recorded an allegation from a member of the public (“Ms C”) and did not refer to any patient related issues or concerns. The allegation referred specifically to a period in or around 1960 when Ms C alleges that she was brought onto the Prestwich Hospital site and sexually abused by Savile.

The investigation team approached Ms C to see if she would be willing to meet to talk about the allegations. Although initial contact was made with her and pursued, the Trust has been unable to meet with her and has therefore relied on the statements she has already provided.

The witness statement provided to Operation Yewtree alleges that she was brought to the Prestwich Psychiatric Hospital site when she was about seven or eight years old by Savile along with another unidentified male. The visit was used as a threat to her in so far as if she disclosed the abuse she was being subjected to she would be brought back to the hospital and locked away with the patients.

Ms C describes being taken to a room at the back of the hospital site by Savile and another unidentified male. The ward smelt horrible, had excrement everywhere and had within it naked male patients. Ms C alleges she was told by Savile that if she ever told anyone about the abuse she was suffering she would be brought back and locked in the room with the men.

On a separate occasion she alleges she was brought to the Prestwich Psychiatric Hospital site again by Savile and another unidentified male and taken onto an empty ward with beds. Ms C does not recall there being any staff on the ward. She was then sexually abused by Savile in the empty ward.

As noted in Section 4 above the Trust has been unable to meet with Ms C to interview her. The investigation team have therefore had to take a considered view of the evidence within the witness statements from Ms C and use any supporting documentary evidence and evidence from the two former staff members relating to the historical context and workings of the hospital in or around 1960 to support the conclusions. As there are no named witnesses within the account from Ms C other than Savile, there is nobody who is able to either verify or refute the allegations.

There were no empty wards at Prestwich Hospital at this time. Ms C’s memory of it being “a massive place” is consistent with what we know about the size of the hospital at the time. It is unlikely that patients would have been walking around naked in the main ward area but there were communal bathrooms on the male wards where patients could have been naked, and there were occasions when patients were incontinent of faeces and needed to be cleaned. Thus her description of there being excrement everywhere and men, some of whom were naked, walking in it would be consistent with what could have been happening on one of the wards at a particular moment in time.

Despite their being no other corroborating evidence of Savile ever having visited the hospital, despite her declining to be interviewed, her ability to describe the hospital is taken as evidence that yes, it was Savile, and yes, it did happen, and yes, she is telling the truth…..

Had they been able to interview her, they might have had the wit to pose other questions like – ‘have you ever visited any other patient at Prestwick hospital’. …in the absence of that:

“Taken in the context of what we know about Prestwich Hospital in the early 1960s, there is nothing in Ms C’s statements that would cause us to question the veracity of her account of what happened.”

‘Had they been able to interview her, they might have had the wit to pose other questions like – ‘have you ever visited any other patient at Prestwick hospital’. …’ or perhaps a question as to whether she had ever been treated for any mental problems.

Hospital after hospital, on opening the highly secret envelope containing the ‘Yewtree allegations’ in respect of their hospital, have found themselves holding a piece of paper which can be roughly summarised as “someone who wouldn’t give their name phoned Yewtree and said that someone whose name they couldn’t remember, had told their aunty, who is now dead, that someone who looked like Jimmy Savile might have been on their ward five years before they were admitted….”

This is insane, one day it will take it’s place along with the great satanic abuse panic. Sadly most people I meet are convinced by all the media lies that JS was indeed a perverted paedophile. I do try to show that no actual evidence exists in most cases but it is a losing battle. I find this whole obcession with children being ‘abused’ very unhealthy.

Carol, just look at the way it is continuing to escalate. Allegations about Leon Brittan which were planted in the press by disgruntled MI5 spooks and subsequently debunked by both the mainstream press and Private Eye back in 1984 are back in circulation 30 years later as fact, meanwhile every conspiracy theorist on the net is shouting ELM GUEST HOUSE despite all indications being it was nothing more than a gay brothel frequented by people whose public status at the time meant that they had to keep their homosexuality under wraps. I’m unconvinced tales of underage sex abuse are anything more than conflation of the place having 17 year old rent boys as part of the facilities, along with the age old belief that poofter = paedophile. Countless resources are being wasted barking at a moon illuminated by decades old homophobia.

Add to that – 14 and 15 year old boys keen to pretend they were 17 year old rent boys in order to get in on the action…. It doesn’t prove that 15 year old boys were being sought out by VIP homosexuals – and personally I am doubtful of any high profile homosexual at the time signing a gay brothel register in his own name – he might just as well have autographed the warrant for his arrest! I can believe that some people signed the register ‘Mickey Mouse’, or ‘Tony Blair’…..

“Peter Mandelson” turned out to be signing in via a University student’s ISP. The student denied he’d done it either. Was that “Ore”? I forget, but the piece I read said that pretty much the entire British Cabinet had their names on “the list”…. except of course it was not them.

It’s the Inverse of when MSN first started and folk would create profiles of themselves as famous movie-stars, using images off the web, and credulous fools would write fawning messages to their hero….

It’s the Inverse of when MSN first started and folk would create profiles of themselves as famous movie-stars, using images off the web, and credulous fools would write fawning messages to their hero….

Got it in one – Politicians may be pretty stupid, but I doubt they sign their name to pieces of paper proving they committed a crime! Expenses claims aside that is….

And, as far as age & homosexuality is concerned, one only has to refer to Russell T. Davies’ celebrated “groundbreaking” Channel 4 series Queers As Folk. At the turn of the millennium this was a depiction of ‘liberation’ in the burgeoning – and highly lucrative – gay scene: a 15 year old rebel shagging older men. In 2014, this is “predatory paedophilia” (as, for that matter, some people would call the 80’s comedy Rita Sue & Bob Too). We’re talking a complete sea change inside 15 years, both ways. In 1984 it had to be behind closed doors, in 1999 on TV and for sale in HMV, in 2014 back in the closet. Main difference is now we brand all orientations ‘child sex abusers’ (no matter what)

Can you tell me why? I just can’t see any benefit to hounding elderly minor celebrities and ruining lives on very flimsy evidence decades old. What on earth is going on? I can see why some are looking for money, publicity or are just fantasists but what’s in it for the police?

Nothing in it for the police, but plenty for the Crusaders at ACPO/NSPCC. The country is overrun by porn and gays and perverts. They even get married now – disgusting. Most copper are puritannical at heart. It’s what makes them join; they want to do good for the community. Spindler was taking the Met officers on Satanic Abuse Awareness courses in 2004!! Who says the devil is not alive and kicking? Building a consent for madness. Look at what Yewtree is. Anna is exposing it. Can you imagine the mentality of the folks putting this stuff together? Now we see the mentality of the bureaucracy at the NHS that is pandering to it. God help the government. It keeps trying to “ignore” all this stuff, just like the Weimar ignored those uncouth brown-shirts.

The ability to arrest, raid, persecute, bail and charge anyone on the basis of one allegation, no matter how ludicrous or unlikely. That seems to be a pretty good deal for the police, and ‘the state’. If the country thinks arresting and jailing famous octogenarians is a good idea, then they may start raiding nursing homes too if some old dear with Alzheimers starts seeing things. Think about it – criminalising inter-person contact and parenthood, the most natural things in the world. Criminalising humanity. Nobody is safe, whatever age they are.

That is the definition of a Police State. It will bring uniform compliance – one only has to examine Private Eye since September 2012, other than jokes and quips a decent narrative on this has been sadly lacking – is this because Ian Hislop is a BBC TV personality as well as editor of PE?

‘Ordinary coppers’ are changing, just as the nation is changing. People will do whatever the have to do keep themselves in “essentials” – and, as I said here http://retardedkingdom.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-death-of-cool.html – they are now ‘educated’ to obey instructions, not to question or think. They will also do whatever in order to remain ‘free’ themselves.

Being seen to be taking genuine child abuse victims seriously and prosecuting child abusers. Genuine victims have to know they’ll be taken seriously and abusers have to know they’ll be pursued. But with the compensation element, it’s a great cover for scammers. Tell a story, know you’ll be believed, earn money.

@Duncan Perhaps they’re still trying to establish if Stoke Mandeville’s lines of barrack huts actually had any cellars in which to perform the Black Masses, back in the dark days before Jimmy rebuilt the shit-hole.http://www.skibbereeneagle.ie/?p=621

Carol, as far as I can see it even extends to those people that say they question everything in the MSM. They appear to have a blind spot to this for some undefined reason.

Yesterday, on a site I visit that considers the global warming myth and related green problems, there was a post about the green bias in CAGW reporting on the BBC. Several commentators were saying that it was only to be expected because the BBC ‘knew’ what Savile was doing with kids and did nothing about it. When I asked if they had studied the ‘evidence’ to confirm their statement just as they said they studied the evidence for and against global warming, one of them responded by asking if I was a paedophile (that comment did get removed by a moderator).

The thing is your experience as well as mine show that a vast number of people have been brainwashed by the supporters of the Frankfurt School and how do you counter that?

I wish I knew! Even the people I consider intelligent just say no smoke without fire, they may concede that it is not all true but refuse to consider maybe none of it is. Of course they only see what the MSM says though I have pointed a few in Anna’s direction and one has changed her mind after reading the blog.

I have never liked Jimmy Savile. Whenever he appeared on the TV or radio I’d turn him straight off. A horrible, creepy weirdo. Same for ‘Fluff’ Freeman. Couldn’t stand their faces or voices. It wouldn’t surprise me for a moment that he had roving hands and would ‘try his luck’ on nubile fans. Par for the course in those days.

However, there is no doubt that Savile was successful and made a lot of money from his success. Not only that but he used his position and fame to do a great deal of good. Not bad for a working class lad from Yorkshire. This, I think is the main issue. Savile was not one of the ‘elite’. He didn’t go to a public school and he didn’t go to Oxbridge. Yet he succeeded in an organisation that requires exactly that from its ‘stars’ – you have to be one of them, you must belong. Savile didn’t. Not only that but he improved people’s lives by unapproved means – no political posturing just practical help. So its no surprise that he was disliked and that rumours started about him. A horrible, creepy, weirdo kiddie entertainer? Must be a paedo! Add in a ‘friendship’ with Maggie and no overt support for Labour and the knives were just waiting to come out.

So they have one celeb perv, maybe they can find a few more. DLT? Well he wouldn’t go quietly from the BBC would he? Rolf Harris? Who better than to convince the public that no one can be trusted that ‘Uncle Rolf?’ Jim Davidson and Freddie Starr – hated by the left so were obviously going to be targeted. The mud sticks even when the evidence proves to be too ludicrous even for Yewtree. Starr is now, reportedly, a broken man. Davidson rescued himself via Big Brother – lucky Jim.

So, now we are all certain that the celebs are up to no good they can start on the Tories, the McAlpine lies having failed to get traction. Cue calls for the Dickens stuff to be re-investigated – this despite the fact that before he died Dickens had said he was grateful to the Home Office for investigating everything he sent them and accepted their findings. Leon Brittan? Well just look at him, must be a perv! What’s that? He has already proven that these allegations were false in 1986(?) – well, no one will remember that so let’s recycle them, especially as he was Home Secretary at the time they want to ‘prove’ Maggie was a paedo enabler. Don’t expect the BBC to remind you either, Brittan is a Zionist after all, he’ll get no sympathy.

No, this latest round is simply political. It’s no co-incidence that Tom Watson is behind a lot of these claims. He headed (maybe still does) Labour’s smear unit – dedicated to destroying the hated enemy. Who better placed that he to pick the targets and lead the charge?

The whole thing stinks and that stink will remain hanging long after the innocent have been found not guilty.

Thank you again Anna for your clear and forensic eye on this garbage. It makes me feel physically sick to read such blatantly biased ‘reasoning’ that is presented.

For example: ‘On a separate occasion she alleges she was brought to the Prestwich Psychiatric Hospital site again by Savile and another unidentified male and taken onto an empty ward with beds. Ms C does not recall there being any staff on the ward. She was then sexually abused by Savile in the empty ward.’ and: ‘There were no empty wards at Prestwich Hospital at this time.’ and yet: “Taken in the context of what we know about Prestwich Hospital in the early 1960s, there is nothing in Ms C’s statements that would cause us to question the veracity of her account of what happened.”

So we’re into normal police territory of ‘Select what you like and ignore the rest’.

You have to remember the bit of the mantra that goes ‘if the victims are not believed, yet again, it will further traumatise them’ – all these NHS trusts have taken legal action re the negligence of re:traumatising victims – ipso, whilst on the one hand they are pointing out that, for instance, the patient wasn’t there at Christmas, Jimmy Savile never visited the Hospital, and anyway the hospital was bombed to smithereens in World War One – on the other hand they are carefully saying that ‘they believe her’…. If you actually read more than one of the reports, and I am now a veteran of 20+, you can actually see where they have cut and pasted the politically correct mantra from a template….

I’m no stranger to reports myself but in my case they dealt with established and verifiable facts. In some cases these were carefully selected to ‘prove’ a particular case. More detailed examination and analysis often threw a completely different light on the allegations. It may be that such analyses ‘traumatised’ the poor policemen involved in the case but so what? Such ‘trauma’ was nothing to the horrendous accusations that the defendants were subject to. The police were mistaken – full stop.

Someone’s memories from over sixty years ago are at best unreliable and when at least one of those ‘memories’ is clearly wrong (empty beds?) that surely increases doubt about the rest and needs further information as to whether the apparently consistent information could have an alternative origin.

To avoid simple logic in the name of possibly ‘re-traumatising’ someone after such a length of time is garbage. If they were mistaken and proven to be mistaken (rather than lying), where’s the trauma? <>

Or am I being too simplistic in stating what to me seems glaringly obvious?

1 in 20 of the population work for the NHS, so I guess that is 1 in 20 of the working population whose mortgage gets paid dependant on them going along with this garbage. Whereas you and I are free to think for ourselves and apply common sense… I have Freedom of Information requests in for each one of these Trusts – the initial responses are horrific, I fear you will be gobsmacked when you see the final tally for this politically correct dance.

And just in passing, would there be any point in passing your observations on to some responsible authority (if there are any) or do we just continue to broadcast the results of common sense in the hope that one day someone useful might see them?

It sounds straight out of the 1990 film Jacob’s Ladder starring Tim Robbins. His character exists in a semi-real world where horrific figments of his imagination. intrude. Here is the infamous hospital scene (unfortunately I can only find a Spanish-dubbed version.)

There are two extraordinary points – one, that you have the time or inclination (or sheer bloody minded determination to examine the evidence) to read all this shit and – two, that no other journalist or editor or TV or radio reporter or producer has bothered to do it. As the mighty spoon faced Prime Minister says “no stone will remain unturned to give tabloid headlines credence and to provide lawyers with cash for claimants and their admin costs”.

There may well be 4000 holes in Blackburn, Lancashire, but that’s nothing compared to the holes in this plot. Another gold star for your exhaustive efforts, Anna. Woodward and Bernstein would be proud of you!

That is terrible. Thank you for showing this so clearly. It makes sense that public money would be tapped. It’s a bottomless pit.

Surely the whole thing needs to be investigated. Why aren’t journalists doing anything? For instance, the DM story about the BBC’s decision not to go ahead with it’s Newsnight programme, and that letter they were desperate to see doesn’t seem to have been followed up. Basic questions are not being asked. The kind of questions that get to the truth are not being asked. Common sense and thinking for onesself are being put aside. Things are being taken at face value.

If and when the penny finally drops, I don’t think the public are going to be able to stomach more reports about “how could we have not known” “hiding in plain sight” “wool pulled over our eyes”.

In a situation where one person tells a story who seems to have superior knowledge, and another listens and bows to the superior knowledge feeling under pressure to believe the story, there is a huge scope for dishonesty. Especially where adults and potentially huge amounts of money are concerned. Honest people do not lie, but liars have no problem with it. They will look sincere, lie to your face and make you believe black is white. If they can sit alongside honest people, all the better, as it makes them look honest too. They will mix fact and fiction to make the fiction go down more easily. Honest people, moral people or people with integrity don’t need to draw attention to their honesty/morality/integrity and don’t need to talk themselves or the facts up. They don’t mind being asked probing questions. They don’t mind background checks. They don’t mind giving details or if you cross-check their story with other truly independent sources. They don’t need to press emotional triggers to try to make you feel impressed by them or sorry for them or make you feel guilty or make you fear that you’re a bad person if you don’t believe the story. They don’t need to convince you.

The description of mental patients walking around naked and covered in feces seems absurd as a description of a NHS hospital of the period, but I do remember an Observer (I think) report, probably from the 1980s alleging that conditions were like that in a mental hospital somewhere in the Greek islands (Leros) under the headline “The Naked and the Damned” and I wonder if someone who didn’t know anything about mental hospitals had formed an impression from that article and transposed it.

There were a couple of documentaries in the 70’s or 80’s I think showing a couple of British institutions, where things had gone a bit to pot. The footage I recall was of all the inmates in an outdoor recreation area. They were being left to their own devices and some of the men had their trousers pulled down and the women were giggling. It was all harmless stuff in essence but it looked very degrading. I would guess it was as the “asylum system” was on it’s last legs over here and the folk in charge seemed torn between either treating the inmates as prisoners or allowing them some “freedom”.

One of the commented-upon things in Jimmy Savile’s 1989 documentary about Broadmoor was his controversial introduction of a mixed disco-nite, and the fact that some of the inmates were boy and girlfriend, although the commentary explained that the “lovers” would never be allowed to be alone together. Many of those in such places were just “sub-normal” and institutionalised. Over half of those in Broadmoor were released within a short period once the decision was taken to allow “care in the community”. Presumably the discoveries in psycho-pharmacy were also very relevant in this regard

Yes the history of Broadmoor is very cloudy. I was not aware of it also being a hospital for the “subnormal” or “mentally retarded” or “developmentally challenged” as the current terminology runs. My understanding is that it was always a prison hospital for the “criminally insane”–and indeed it had early residents such as dictionary contributor Dr. William Minors and the artist Richard Dadd–and was run by the Home Office, and that its employees were members of the Prison Officers’ Association union.

The UK used to have an extensive network of hospitals for the subnormal, for example Meanwood hospital in Leeds was completely separate from High Royds Hospital, a mental hospital for the mentally ill. I don’t think there were any developments in psychopharmacology around 1980 that would have made any difference in treating (or controlling) the subnormal, but yes, from that time on the trend was to have them cared for by families or foster carers or in group homes in the community and not in large institutions that became very expensive to run and maintain as overall living standards rose and cheap labour and employees living in dormitories on site were no longer available as in the immediate post World War II era.

No doubt most of the hospitals for the mentally retarded have now been turned into tasteful condominiums in a park-like setting.

I watched about 20 minutes of this, but I found the tabloid mentality and presentation superficial and tiresome.

The documentary mixes and matches perfectly legitimate complaints of inappropriate treatment, like patients being placed in seclusion for the whole day for failing to get up on time, with vague allegations, like a fellow who had paranoid schizophrenia threw a stone through the window of an unemployment office, and was sent to a local mental hospital where he proved to be unmanageable, but it didn’t seem right to send him to prison, so he was sent to Broadmoor, where he didn’t really need to be. It doesn’t make any sense and surely there are legal processes that have to be followed under the direction of a court, so if there is any fault it is with the d judge controlling his case. People can’t just be shuffled around without just cause, and there was no explanation of why he was unmanageable at the local mental hospital.

Another comment was that when Broadmoor was first opened the perimeter wall was four feet high and in 2002 it was 12 feet high. Clearly when the place first opened the wall was just a boundary marker and not a security perimeter. In the nineteenth century, before the days of motorized vehicular transportation, it would have been extremely difficult for an inmate to escape from a rural location, because as soon as the alert was raised, police would be on the lookout at train stations. In addition the problem of smuggling contraband like street drugs or weapons or cell phones inside the facility would hardly have existed at all.

I think I would also agree with the hospital management that having someone walking about in “shackles” imported from the USA would be more therapeutic than keeping them permanently in seclusion, if they were very assaultive or self injurious. However I would question the use of the word “shackles” which is UK terminology. In the US such a device would be called a “walking restraint” and would typically consist of a pair of padded leather wrist cuffs linked together and also linked to a leather belt worn round the waist. There might also be another set for the ankles. The aim would be to make it impossible for the individual to hit or kick others, strangle others with the cuffs, or to bite themselves, but at the same time make it possible for them to move around, take part in interviews, and so on. OK, maybe you don’t like it, but suggest something better and explain why it would have worked with this man.

I think there’s a generalised “horror” trope which is now part of the folk culture. These institutions are generally remembered as rather fearsome places where people were locked away and terrible things happened. The recent season 2 of American Horror Story, “Asylum” is an example of the type.

That was towards the end based on a specific famous (in the USA) documentary made by a young Geraldo Rivera where he sneaked into an institution and filmed the appalling conditions- naked patients, faeces, general appalling neglect etc. It’s a generalised enough type of imagery that a person could pick it up from pretty much anywhere.

Jimmy was being very sensible then. I have a great friend shrink who was put in charge of a similar institution like Broodmoor at age 27 as was he considered to be so brilliant. The nurses approached him one day with a serious problem, the male patients were sneaking into the female wards and sleeping with the female patients and they just didn’t have the staff to cope- “what should we do?”. “Teach them how to use condoms” was his obvious reply. I think he may have got his MBE after that.

@erichardcastle I was reading some commentary yesterday from a long-time Broadmoor worker and he was saying that after a big “Report” in 1999 all “mixed” activities at Broadmoor were banned again. The sexes were no longer allowed to mix even at the coffee machine apparently. To be fair, by then the “unecessarily incarcerated” were being released anyway and I guess even a criminally insane woman might have been nervous of sharing a coffee with Mr. Sutcliffe.

Abuse Time Line 1) Find unknown/unidentifiable male companion. (Note to self: A blind, deaf, mute would be best.) 2) Find 8 year old child playing alone and without adult supervision or presence. 3) Transport child to a Hospital and walk through the public/staff areas unnoticed. 4) Find a large empty room with beds. 5) Subject child to horrifying sexual abuse. 6) Return through public/staff areas, again unnoticed, with traumatised 8 year old child. (Note to self: remain incognito….do not stop to sign autographs/avoid cups of tea with the porters) 7) Return child to original location. 8) Ensure child tells no one.

All credit to your dogged investigations Anna. It put the efforts of the MSN’s ‘reporters’ to shame.

One minor, but relevant point:

“Someone has gone without treatment, or a pay rise, to pay for each of these execrable reports. Maybe it was your Aunty.” Rather – all of us tax payers (and that includes kids who’ve bought a chocolate bar out of their pocket money) have paid for this farce.

Just wanted to say how nice it was to hear some common sense from David Mellor yesterday, never liked him but he spoke sense and Matthew Parris today. At least there is some sanity left, not much though.

It’s quite surreal. Like watching Baron and Baroness Bomburst of the Vulgarian Empire setting loose the Child Catcher on a wholly unsuspecting rustic population, with the only sane people left on the whole planet being the Truly Scrumptious Anna and her band of Caractacus Potts

I thought about this when I heard it on the radio. Given the number of QCs who could have done this job, it is extraordinary that May reached the decision to appoint somebody from the NSPCC to do the job.

The NSPCC are scum with a board composed of radfems who peddle all the garbage–the patriarchy/women are brainwashed into being heterosexual–the whole nine yards of Marxist twaddle.

It won’t be “politicians”–it will be male and non-leftist politicians.

And we will see if the male half of the population regard what will come out of it as “a sure-fire guaranteed hit”. We already have jail–for men only of course– on the basis of worthless and unsupported accusations. Who knows what shit the radfems now think they can get away with.

Perhaps… astonishing as it may seem we appear to agree on this and the direction of developments…

I have no knowledge of the agenda of the NSPCC, or the composition of their board, so will content myself with saying that this saga seems to be the gift that keeps on giving. It provides a useful distraction to other political issues in the run up to the General Election and the Tories can say, perhaps rightly, that they are attempting to get a handle on this, after years of the political class brushing things under the carpet…

Of course, they may get the brush out again, if it proves too politically damaging to the party of Government.

Thanks for that Anna, it was a very interesting read, thanks also for the links to the actual reports. One thing I noticed was that when they managed to drill down to the people who events were supposed to have happened too, they found those people denied that anything had happened, for example porter 3 and Ms A. Its almost as if Yewtree never actually investigated anything.

Top work as usual, Anna! Close examination of the reports reveals that the bulk of the “evidence” unearthed is purely circumstantial, but the way they have been reported in the press has people frothing at the mouth over a “catalogue of abuse”, a paradox that speaks volumes about the current state of society. Today’s MSM is like the loan shark telling the desperate family “don’t bother reading the small print – here’s the gist”, knowing that they will gladly sign almost anything heedless of the true cost. Does The Man In The Street need to believe in monsters in order to feel better about his own existence? The rise of misery-lit, the proliferation of Jeremy Kyle-style “entertainment”, and of course the rampant Savilisation of the UK seems to suggest that this is so, and the MSM is only too keen to incite the mob by giving them the biggest monster possible – one who is conveniently already dead, and thus whose blackened memory the press can keep alive indefinitely, with no chance of redemption. I shall leave the last word to Primo Levi:

“Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common men, the functionaries ready to believe and to act without asking questions.”